TCC Protocol – new opportunity or new danger?

News

20/02/2017

Valentine’s Day 2017 was the three month anniversary of the new Protocol for the Technology & Construction Court coming into force. Whilst not everyone else will have marked this event, the question should now be asked: does this new Protocol represent an improvement over its predecessor?

The latest iteration essentially seeks to introduce proportionality to TCC pre-proceedings. The single largest change is that compliance with the new Protocol is no longer mandatory. The parties can consent to ignore it. One might think what is the use of such a Protocol?

If followed, the Protocol no longer requires a full pre-action articulation of the dispute. It was not uncommon under the old Protocol for the letter of claim and response to be the longest documents in a case. Now one need only give an outline of the claim/defence.

Accordingly, henceforth it will only be in exceptional circumstances that the Court will impose costs sanctions for non-compliance with the Protocol.

Further, a new concept has been introduced called the Protocol Referee procedure. This again is not obligatory but, if agreed to, then a party can apply for a Referee to make determinations concerning the Protocol. This is not the same as having a mediation or settlement meeting (which are still part of the process) or an early neutral evaluation but supposedly gives an extra element to the Protocol system that is designed to assist the parties. It is unclear to what extent it will really assist the parties to achieve anything substantive though.

Overall the aim to reduce costs and complexity at an early stage is plainly a sound and welcome one. Nevertheless, at first blush there could appear to be a lack of conviction and therefore cohesion to this new regime with its weakened status. It is, however, likely that an established way of using this Protocol and/or commencing TCC claims will emerge and that it will vindicate the new Protocol by simplifying many claims and thereby disposing of them earlier.

I am less optimistic, however, that it will do anything to alter the current course (and cost) of the more significant disputes. It is possibly for that reason that the new Protocol allows the parties not to follow it and the recent changes to the TCC Guide itself could help with those claims.

Perhaps we can reserve judgment so that we can revisit this subject next Valentine’s Day?

Latest News & Events

Adam Dawson awarded MBE in King’s Birthday Honours List 2025

Chambers congratulates Adam Dawson upon being awarded an MBE for services to charity and service to the Jewish Community. For over 30 years Adam has been involved in the heart of the Jewish community, leading several charities and organisations. After a year as Chair of…

The Dekagram: 9th June 2025

This week Russell Wilcox and Thomas Clarke examine whether in applications to set aside default judgment there exists such a thing as a ‘co-defendant principle’; essential reading for all practitioners. Co-defendants and Applications to Set Aside: the More the Merrier? In the recent case of…

URS v BDW – The winner takes it all…

Introduction On Wednesday 21st of May, the Supreme Court handed down judgment in the long-awaited case of URS Corporation Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd [2025] UKSC 21.  The judgment was awaited by almost all with an interest in construction law and related professional negligence. BDW…

Subscribe to our mailing list

Deka Chambers: 5 Norwich Street, London EC4A 1DR

© Deka Chambers 2025

Search

Portfolio Builder

Select the expertise that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Portfolio
Title Type CV Email

Remove All

Download


Click here to share this shortlist.
(It will expire after 30 days.)